Also known as: Maihemium est homicidium inchoatum · mahemium est homicidium inchoatum · mayhem · maim as incomplete homicide
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A common law maxim providing that the crime of mayhem constitutes an incomplete or attempted homicide because it involves the malicious infliction of serious bodily injury that disables the victim without causing death.
Madison Meyers drove a tractor over Michael Miller's leg during a farm dispute, crushing the limb so severely that it required amputation. Michael survived. Because the injury permanently disabled a limb used for defense, the act meets the definition of mayhem under the maxim treating that offense as inchoate homicide.
Maria Morales rigged a fuel pipeline bypass and disabled the leak alarm to steal product. The resulting blast caused a maintenance worker permanent loss of a hand. The disabling injury itself qualifies as mayhem under the inchoate-homicide maxim even though death occurred by other means.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Matthew Martinez intentionally gouged Miranda Morales's eye during a bar altercation, permanently destroying her vision in that eye. The act meets the common-law definition of mayhem. Prosecutors may charge the completed offense even though no death occurred, consistent with the maxim that mayhem is inchoate homicide.
A jury found Mohan Malhotra liable for mayhem after he severed Madison Meyers's hand with a machete during a street fight. The trial court added damages to the verdict. The maxim supplies the doctrinal foundation that the disabling injury, though nonfatal, carries the gravity of an incomplete homicide for liability purposes.
Michael Miller published an article accusing a judge of leniency toward a defendant who had committed mayhem by biting off an opponent's ear. The publication led to contempt proceedings. The underlying offense remained punishable as mayhem because the maxim treats the disabling injury as an inchoate form of homicide.
Maria Morales slashed Matthew Martinez across the face with a broken bottle during a domestic dispute, severing his nose and leaving him permanently disfigured. She raised an insanity defense. The maxim still permits a mayhem conviction because the offense is treated as inchoate homicide even when mental-state defenses are litigated.
The maxim classifies mayhem as an incomplete homicide because the offense requires the malicious infliction of serious bodily injury that disables the victim without causing death. At common law, mayhem therefore occupies an intermediate position between misdemeanor assault and completed homicide.
No. The year-and-a-day limitation applies only to homicide charges. Because the maxim treats mayhem as inchoate homicide rather than completed homicide, a mayhem prosecution remains available even when the victim survives beyond the one-year-and-one-day period.
The injury must deprive the victim of the use of a bodily member in a way that reduces the ability to fight or defend, such as the permanent loss of an eye, hand, or nose. Temporary or minor wounds do not qualify.
Yes, provided the force is reasonable and not intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm as defined in the Restatement. The maxim supplies context for what counts as serious harm but does not eliminate the privilege when the elements of self-defense are met.
…the United States, would, under any law of the United States then in force, constitute the crime of either murder, manslaughter, mayhem, robbery, assault and battery, perjury, subornation of perjury, criminal obstruction of legal process or resistance of officers in discharge of official duty, arson, or larceny; and if one…